The questions regarding the Bloedel Conservatory lie with the structure's damaged roof.
A couple of clarifications regarding this ridiculous post:
- The place was a virtual ghost town for years…up until about a month ago. Attendance at the conservatory declined from 119,000 visitors of which 28,000 were tour bus admissions in 2001, to 65,000 visitors of which 940 were tour bus admissions just five years later. So if you divide this into monthly averages, you had 5,417 visitors streaming through the doors per month in 2006. According to NPA Park Board Commissioner Ian Robertson, that figure dwindled to a paltry 2,571 in December 2008. Sorry Ian and Daniel, but a boost over a one-month span at this late stage in the game is far too little and far too late to mask the indifference demonstrated towards promoting the attraction by previous NPA administrations.
- Yes, an NPA dominated City Council did approve 2007 staff recommendations to install a new boiler at a cost of $392,236 to create greater energy efficiency with the facility. Too bad they completely failed to recognize any type of priority with the long-standing crack in the famed dome and the many plexiglass bubbles on the roof that are also in desperate need of replacement. When looking at the Park Board Capital Plan budget for 2006-2008, the allotment for the Bloedel Conservatory roof panel replacements is $0. Hey, the dome is falling apart and on the verge of needing a complete replacement, but let’s target some long-term savings by investing in a $400,000 boiler. Brilliant.
- The above-linked staff report mentions that “the replacement of a significant amount of aging building systems (including 14 boiler plants)…represents avoided future capital expenditures.” So why wasn’t that exact same preventative-styled logic applied to the Conservatory roof by Sullivan et al. if indeed the facility was such a priority for them? Clearly the the deterioration of the paneling and the crack in the structure are not phenomena that happened over night.
Bottom line? The conservatory was never an item of high-importance for previous NPA Councils (the list of major projects funded by Capital Plans since 1997 never included the conservatory roof over this time period, and with the exception of 2002 COPE landslide, all other Park Board compositions over this time frame have been NPA dominated – 1996, 1999, 2005), and it continues not to be under the Vision administration – for good reason, as far as I am concerned. If the facility cannot even sustain the basic level of attendance to cover the costs of operations, then it does not deserve a $2 million bailout at a time when fiscal restraint and tough funding decisions are necessary.
So savour that last photo Daniel…and as a tribute to the administration you served under, I hope it includes the new boiler in the shot.
